Liberal Forum

Misty » 06 Oct 2018 1:52 am » wrote: The Senate confirmation process is not the same as the legal process.
It's a job interview, not a trial.

Until the democrat smear machine gets rolling...

Then it becomes an e-lynching.

Y'all can pretend you didn't try the guy in the media, using hype in place of evidence - but you zimmermanned the man.

The one thing democrats can be counted on for is rope at lynching time.

Huey » 06 Oct 2018 1:07 pm » wrote:
Need to get the attention of a moderator so I have to break my absence from this thread.

Hi Misty. I see you are posting. You might want to look into this. You might, although I doubt it, have a serious security breach. Remember, I have screen shots.

Hi Misty.

Please put on your moderator hat. Could you please explain how a thread I did no create, with OP I did not create, with a title I did not create shows me as the the thread starter? See, this thread appears to be termin8tors thread where someone changed the title. Remember, the title can be changed all day long. But posts have a header with the name of the thread on it when a post is made.

So, either someone hacked my account ((not likely due to the presence of other thread titles) OR a moderator changed the thread title and deleted posts and edited an OP.

Any explanation would be appreciated. And since it looks as if I created this thread I am not giving permission to change it just yet. I do have screen shots.

This matter is being investigated at the highest levels by a prestigious committee.

Cannonpointer » 07 Oct 2018 8:22 pm » wrote:

Huey » 06 Oct 2018 1:07 pm » wrote:
Need to get the attention of a moderator so I have to break my absence from this thread.

Hi Misty. I see you are posting. You might want to look into this. You might, although I doubt it, have a serious security breach. Remember, I have screen shots.

Hi Misty.

Please put on your moderator hat. Could you please explain how a thread I did no create, with OP I did not create, with a title I did not create shows me as the the thread starter? See, this thread appears to be termin8tors thread where someone changed the title. Remember, the title can be changed all day long. But posts have a header with the name of the thread on it when a post is made.

So, either someone hacked my account ((not likely due to the presence of other thread titles) OR a moderator changed the thread title and deleted posts and edited an OP.

Any explanation would be appreciated. And since it looks as if I created this thread I am not giving permission to change it just yet. I do have screen shots.

This matter is being investigated at the highest levels by a prestigious committee.

Senators Grassley and Spartacus?

Termin8tor » 06 Oct 2018 2:48 pm » wrote:
Wow, one heck of a list of smears you have there.

.

Excellent meme.

I never allowed myself to be alone with women, when I was married - considered it simple respect.

On another note, what the demoncrats did was dirty, and I laugh at their failure - BUT...

Kavanaugh lied under oath, and should have been scrubbed for it. Yes, the circumstances were slimy.

But he lied. Under oath. We can do better. We MUST do better. His confirmation will always be a cause for schadenfreude, never be a cause for celebration or pride.

Huey » 07 Oct 2018 8:27 pm » wrote:
Senators Grassley and Spartacus?

Misty and Bludog.

Misty » 06 Oct 2018 3:50 pm » wrote: It is both.

And a lynching to boot - but a failed one. That bacon-necked bastard slipped through the noose.

Cannonpointer » 07 Oct 2018 8:29 pm » wrote:

Huey » 07 Oct 2018 8:27 pm » wrote:
Senators Grassley and Spartacus?

Misty and Bludog.

Don’t know Bludog. But shouldn’t Misty recuse herself? That what they request Justice Thomas and now Justice Kavanaugh do.

Misty » 07 Oct 2018 12:08 am » wrote: I can't wait to see it.

Your committee will be responsible to follow up on it with due haste.

I am counting on you to get to the bottom of this matter - I've assigned bludog to assist you. Whatever support you need is at your disposal, day or night. Just put it back where you found it, and turn the light off.

Misty » 07 Oct 2018 1:08 pm » wrote:

Maybe while in Africa you shouldn't wear a pithe helmet which has historical links to colonial rule in Africa.

Or a jacket like this when you are going to visit children that your husband ripped away from their parents.



What exactly does she DO anyway?

She gives demoncrats an outlet for their misogyny.

Huey » 07 Oct 2018 8:33 pm » wrote: Don’t know Bludog. But shouldn’t Misty recuse herself? That what they request Justice Thomas and now Justice Kavanaugh do.

Given her hatred of our Flag and her Marxist tendencies, she should blow herself up with a sooey side vest at the statute of liberdy. But she ain't gonna do it. She's probably not even a cutter.

She punishes herself by horing around and being Daddy's Little **** Doll.

Cannonpointer » 07 Oct 2018 8:43 pm » wrote:

Huey » 07 Oct 2018 8:33 pm » wrote: Don’t know Bludog. But shouldn’t Misty recuse herself? That what they request Justice Thomas and now Justice Kavanaugh do.

Given her hatred of our Flag and her Marxist tendencies, she should blow herself up with a sooey side vest at the statute of liberdy. But she ain't gonna do it. She's probably not even a cutter.

She punishes herself by horing around and being Daddy's Little **** Doll.

Fine. She is the forums perennial victim.

Cannonpointer » 07 Oct 2018 8:28 pm » wrote:On another note, what the demoncrats did was dirty, and I laugh at their failure - BUT...

Kavanaugh lied under oath, and should have been scrubbed for it. Yes, the circumstances were slimy.

But he lied. Under oath. We can do better. We MUST do better. His confirmation will always be a cause for schadenfreude, never be a cause for celebration or pride.

So what was it lied about, his brand of beer?

What boofus means?

Denying throwing ice?

I'm sure it was of huge importance.

Termin8tor » 07 Oct 2018 8:54 pm » wrote:
So what was it lied about, his brand of beer?

What boofus means?

Denying throwing ice?

I'm sure it was of huge importance.

There were several lies - you named two of them. I was very sorry to see him lie - I don't feel like sitting here and picking through his testimony and listing all of them.

Pretend he's a democrat that lied under oath.

See that?

Yeah - you see it.

Huey » 07 Oct 2018 8:51 pm » wrote:
Fine. She is the forums perennial victim.

Said her second best accomplice...

Cannonpointer » 07 Oct 2018 9:01 pm » wrote:

Huey » 07 Oct 2018 8:51 pm » wrote:
Fine. She is the forums perennial victim.

Said her second best accomplice...

Nah, only when mods change thread titles without authorization because they are incapable of winning a debate or flame war based on merit.

Cannonpointer » 07 Oct 2018 8:59 pm » wrote:

Termin8tor » 07 Oct 2018 8:54 pm » wrote:So what was it lied about, his brand of beer?

What boofus means?

Denying throwing ice?

I'm sure it was of huge importance.

There were several lies - you named two of them. I was very sorry to see him lie - I don't feel like sitting here and picking through his testimony and listing all of them.

Pretend he's a democrat that lied under oath.

See that?

Yeah - you see it.

No, I don't see any lies, and if some liberal judge of high character made some minor mis-statement about a microscopic issue, I'd cut them slack.

Sorry to disappoint you.

democrats are for the people.

Termin8tor » 07 Oct 2018 10:14 pm » wrote:
No, I don't see any lies, and if some liberal judge of high character made some minor mis-statement about a microscopic issue, I'd cut them slack.

Sorry to disappoint you.

Liar.

If it was a liberal judge, your team would not call it minor - the other team would.

Your team would not call it microscopic - the other team would.

Your team would not pretend they couldn't see the lies - the other team would.

Kavanaugh lied. He lied at the very least about the definition of various terms in his high school year book that he should never have been asked about, and frankly should have flatly refused to address. The stupid republicans failed to protect him, and he failed to speak the truth without flinching, as we expect judges to do, even when it is not comfortable.

Your team would blow those same lies out of all proportion, did they come from the other side, and consider those perjuries macroscopic, character revealing, disqualifying. And your team would be correct.

I'm just calling perjury perjury, while you simper about what the definition of microscopic is - while you misuse language to insinuate that some perjuries are justified.

He prefered to lie, rather than let go of the preposterous choir boy narrative he peddles about his entitled youth. And even though he should never have been put in that position, once in it, he showed his true character: perjurer.

We should demand better of a SCOTUS nominee, instead of playing team. Trump has a fat roster of judges - Kavanaugh should have been disqualified, for reasons of poor character.

Cannonpointer » 07 Oct 2018 11:02 pm » wrote:

Termin8tor » 07 Oct 2018 10:14 pm » wrote:No, I don't see any lies, and if some liberal judge of high character made some minor mis-statement about a microscopic issue, I'd cut them slack.

Sorry to disappoint you.

Liar.

If it was a liberal judge, your team would not call it minor - the other team would.

Your team would not call it microscopic - the other team would.

Your team would not pretend they couldn't see the lies - the other team would.

**** off, psycho. Sotomayor lied in her hearing about how she views the 2nd Amendment. Have I called for her indictment? For her impeachment?

Have Repubs?

Kavanaugh lied. He lied at the very least about the definition of various terms in his high school year book that he should never have been asked about, and frankly should have flatly refused to address. The stupid republicans failed to protect him, and he failed to speak the truth without flinching, as we expect judges to do, even when it is not comfortable.

Your team would blow those same lies out of all proportion, did they come from the other side, and consider those perjuries macroscopic, character revealing, disqualifying. And your team would be correct.

I'm just calling perjury perjury, while you simper about what the definition of microscopic is - while you misuse language to insinuate that some perjuries are justified.

Seven witnesses testified that he was correct about that slang.

Try to keep up.